Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Katie's New Face

nationalgeographic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 337 posts

Re: Katie's New Face

#141

Post by bodas »

labbyz wrote: post #137
philjohn wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK is soon to be moving to an opt out for organ donation (with the usual caveat that family members can still refuse to allow it), I was saddened to see some people spinning it as "the government wants control over my body" when all it takes is a simple checkbox to say you don't want to be a part of it.

Make it opt-in. Then you give control away to the government deliberately. All it takes is a simple checkbox to say you want to be a part of it. It should be easier to receive mailing list spam, than it is to sign over your body, but opt-out makes it the other way around. Forgetting (or being unwilling to be forced) to sign a checkbox does not make one a willing participant, but an unwitting one. I understand this sa…

Bodies are a kind of use it or lose it deal. If you are buried, everything except your bones and teeth will be eaten. Organ donation is the least of your sovereignty problems.

Re: Katie's New Face

#142

Post by goodells »

DoctorOetker wrote: post #139

> The face surgeons go first. But since organs are precious and face transplants are not lifesaving, if the donor’s condition started to decline , the team would have to abandon its work to allow other surgeons to collect the donated organs. What exactly is meant with "if the donor's condition started to decline"? How does one monitor the condition of organs in a dead body? What technology is used to monitor the stat…

I’m only an EMT, but I can try to answer this for you. The organ donor was brain dead, but the heart continued to beat and a ventilator was used. The organs would stay perfused with oxygen and nutrients and the surgery would be performed as if the donor were otherwise alive. Surgery is inherently risky - risks include spontaneous bleeding or clotting that could abruptly end the organ recovery. I believe this is the situation they are referring to.

Re: Katie's New Face

#143

Post by maxxxxx »

jacquesm wrote: post #134
maxxxxx wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was at German military we saw similar videos for our first aid training. The video opened my eyes. In my view this should be required viewing for everyone to make sure they understand what war really is. With all the cool smart bombs, jet fighters and night vision goggles it's being portrayed as way too clean and fun.

And with war-by-remotecontrol it gets ever closer to looking and feeling like a video game where you go home to your family after killing a bunch of people on the other side of the world.

Killing still sounds too clean. People got burned badly, lost limbs or lost half their face.

Re: Katie's New Face

#144

Post by detaro »

DoctorOetker wrote: post #139

> The face surgeons go first. But since organs are precious and face transplants are not lifesaving, if the donor’s condition started to decline , the team would have to abandon its work to allow other surgeons to collect the donated organs. What exactly is meant with "if the donor's condition started to decline"? How does one monitor the condition of organs in a dead body? What technology is used to monitor the stat…

Given the 3 days between death and operation and the ventilator, sounds like a case of someone in a coma and being declared dead due to brain function ceasing. In such cases basic stuff like heartbeat etc is still running on its own (otherwise the tissue wouldn't be supplied with oxygen and die), so there's still vital signs to monitor.

Re: Katie's New Face

#146

Post by eagsalazar2 »

steve19 wrote: post #114
eagsalazar2 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear you (I also have kids) but I always feel like the level of hype here is 75% about that pretty, white "before" photo. Yes it is tragic but what about the 1000s of disadvantaged kids that yearly fall into crime and drugs, ruining their lives, being incarcerated or killed, because of institutionalized indifference to the poor non-white members of our society and the corresponding negative feedback loops that trap…

Stop seeing everything through a racial lens. It is the first time an incredibly complex surgery has been performed, the race of the person is irrelevant. If this surgery was in China and performed on a Chinese person it would be just as groundbreaking.

Sorry, I definitely disagree with you and I'm not going to stop. I don't see everything through a racial lens but I do think there is a lot of racial injustice and it should be called out and discussed where it makes sense, like here (IMO).

Re: Katie's New Face

#147

Post by roguecoder »

WC3w6pXxgGd wrote: post #122
monkeynotes wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems to me she wants to live. I am not sure anyone would go through with that surgery if they did not want to live. Edit: Reading more about the story. Her suicide attempt was entirely impulsive and not premeditated at all. > "I never thought of doing that ever before, and so on hearing about it, I just didn't know how to handle it," she told National Geographic. "I felt so guilty that I had put my family through su…

If you want to talk about inappropriate, talking about gun control in relation to this story is COMPLETELY inappropriate here. This 100% is a story about suicide, hence my comment about assisted suicide.

Gun access increases the rate of youth suicides: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/gun-own...

Re: Katie's New Face

#148

Post by roguecoder »

colmvp wrote: post #131
TomMckenny wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps if there are no instruments at hand that allow the young to act on such a disastrous suicidal impulse, at least some of these incidents could be prevented.

Maybe. A close friend of mine used pills instead of a pistol. Thankfully they didn’t succeed in their endeavour but the fact is people who are intent on doing the deed will find a method.

The rate of success with pills is lower, and it allows time for regret and the patient to seek help, whereas with a gun after the trigger is pulled it's over. The reasons that American men commit suicide twice as often as women do even though only half as many men attempt suicide is because they are more likely to use a gun.

Re: Katie's New Face

#150

Post by jdietrich »

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #132
TomMckenny wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps if there are no instruments at hand that allow the young to act on such a disastrous suicidal impulse, at least some of these incidents could be prevented.

Ugh, are you trying to make this anti gun? There are so many ways to commit suicide it's hardly worth listing them here. If her family kept any pills in the bathroom it's likely she could have killed herself without leaving the room.

It isn't about guns per se, it's about all lethal items. The how of suicide is just as important as the why. Having anything in your home that is a highly efficient means of killing yourself greatly increases the risk that you will in fact kill yourself. Most suicidal intent is temporary and most suicidal behaviour is impulsive, so restricting access to highly effective means of suicide is a vital tool in preventing suicide.

In 1998, the UK restricted sales of paracetamol (acetaminophen) to packs of no more than 32 tablets. The result was a lasting reduction in suicides by paracetamol poisoning, with no commensurate increase in suicide attempts by other means. Several studies have found that interventions like installing suicide prevention barriers on bridges can reduce the suicide rate rather than merely changing the choice of means.

https://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.f403

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/means-matter/useful-links/bibli...

If you take an overdose of tablets or slit your wrists, you'll probably survive with suitable medical care. You probably have the opportunity to change your mind, call an ambulance and save your own life. Very few people survive a gunshot wound to the head; all of them sustain life-altering injuries.

You have the right to own a gun, but that comes with responsibilities. You need to recognise that your gun poses a serious risk to you and your family, especially if it isn't consistently stored in a suitable gun safe or someone in the house is at risk of suicide.

If you're worried about the mental health of a family member, controlling their access to convenient and highly lethal means of suicide could well prevent an impulsive decision from becoming a tragedy. Clear out your liquor cabinet, throw out any surplus medication and get your gun out of the house.

http://www.meansmatter.org/

Post reply on HN